Recommend me Philosophy

true, perhaps he goes too far in the other direction, but in my mind his general point remains valid. but i suppose this is a bit of a tangent, and not what you were originally asking about...

obviously, as heated as some of these people are.

Sartre, theres a man whose stories I could seriously enjoy, but reading his philosophy(I tried Being and Nothingness) was like reading how to build a NASA space station.

  Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

obviously, as heated as some of these people are.

 

Sartre, theres a man whose stories I could seriously enjoy, but reading his philosophy(I tried Being and Nothingness) was like reading how to build a NASA space station.

Trust me, B&N for me will be at least a year-long endeavor, probably more.

I've studied specific parts of the text for enough hours to equate to days. However, I only recently took it upon myself to read it cover to cover a few months ago. Of course I've also read a few of his other publications and numerous companions to his work and also contemporary articles written about it. It's a time consuming process. I had to read the intro to B&N literally twenty or so times to really get a handle on it all even with what I've studied thus far. It really is a complex process.

And indeed the outburst I made last post was a bit uncalled for but what I meant to say is that an academic framework provides a great context for branching out to personal philosophies. Many institutions teach various forms of philosophy and it all ultimately relates - you just have to make the relation significant. In fact, I feel that an academic setting is almost necessary for the type of philosophical branching out we're discussing. It most certainly encourages it and I don't see how you could let it hinder your own branching out if you wanted to branch out in the first place. Again, a class setting for philosophy provides a great context for philosophy in general and depending on your interest level, your professors can become some of your best philosophical friends - even those who teach philosophies different than what you believe can help. There's always an outlet in an academic setting. Am I really to believe that all collegiate professors are necessarily bound to one particular point of view? Haven't you had a philosophy professor tell you that they still "do not know" and are not ashamed to admit it (speaking to homeboy who made the comment about classroom philosophy earlier)?

For there is no context for "non-western" philosophy without western philosophy......

i dont question for one second the validity of the classroom setting, but in my mind, it has its limits. the framework of academia (in my mind) can only provide so much, and theres a possibility of your thinking becoming too compartmentalized..

but, im not a philosophy student, nor am i a philosopher, so i accept the possibility that i may be naive

  Z_B_Z said:

i dont question for one second the validity of the classroom setting, but in my mind, it has its limits. the framework of academia (in my mind) can only provide so much, and theres a possibility of your thinking becoming too compartmentalized..

 

but, im not a philosophy student, nor am i a philosopher, so i accept the possibility that i may be naive

I mean, of course, but this is with anything.

If I learn to produce music from someone who teaches me everything from the ground up the way they've learned I'm undoubtedly gonna be biased. But that doesn't mean I can't start from that approach and learn an infinite amount of other approaches.

My point is, of course the classroom has its limitations. True learning goes beyond the classroom. But sometimes (at least for me) its good to have a reference point, or, someone or something to show you the way - not hold your hand. If you are going to assume a particular academic influence without question then you are going to be biased in whatever approach you take no matter if you pick up a random philosophy book on your own time away from a school setting. Sure, there's one thing to be said for picking up any philosophy book and reading it for its sake - just don't be discouraged when you come to find that the context you received and interpreted that work in may truly bear no relation to its actual philosophical context. As with anything, you sort of have to have a point of reference. Of course picking up any philosophy book at any random time is interesting and I am in no position to question the meaning that has for the person who does it - but there cannot be denied the philosophical web that has been spun which in turn supports all of philosophy. Philosophy supports itself. No text should be considered in isolation.

I like pussy. And feminism, if it helps make pussy wet.

  lumpenprol said:

I like pussy. And feminism, if it helps make pussy wet.

It doesn't. Neither for you nor I anyway.

  Panoptimist said:

  Z_B_Z said:

i dont question for one second the validity of the classroom setting, but in my mind, it has its limits. the framework of academia (in my mind) can only provide so much, and theres a possibility of your thinking becoming too compartmentalized..

 

but, im not a philosophy student, nor am i a philosopher, so i accept the possibility that i may be naive

 

I mean, of course, but this is with anything.

 

 

If I learn to produce music from someone who teaches me everything from the ground up the way they've learned I'm undoubtedly gonna be biased. But that doesn't mean I can't start from that approach and learn an infinite amount of other approaches.

 

My point is, of course the classroom has its limitations. True learning goes beyond the classroom. But sometimes (at least for me) its good to have a reference point, or, someone or something to show you the way - not hold your hand. If you are going to assume a particular academic influence without question then you are going to be biased in whatever approach you take no matter if you pick up a random philosophy book on your own time away from a school setting. Sure, there's one thing to be said for picking up any philosophy book and reading it for its sake - just don't be discouraged when you come to find that the context you received and interpreted that work in may truly bear no relation to its actual philosophical context. As with anything, you sort of have to have a point of reference. Of course picking up any philosophy book at any random time is interesting and I am in no position to question the meaning that has for the person who does it - but there cannot be denied the philosophical web that has been spun which in turn supports all of philosophy. Philosophy supports itself. No text should be considered in isolation.

i think youve explained yourself quite clearly with this, and for the most part, i agree with you. well put.

the shtreets

I don't know, it's kind of like Catholicism, might have the opposite effect.

  lumpenprol said:

I don't know, it's kind of like Catholicism, might have the opposite effect.

This is a possibility.

In fact its the one I subscribe to every day.

If you study philosophy in school rather than on your own, you are likely to understand it, think, speak and write about it much better than you would working on it alone. You need to talk to people about the ideas, interpret the texts together, have assignments where you have to write your own arguments and get feedback on them. This is the best way to develop the skills you need to appreciate -- and do -- good philosophy.

Also, I think that those who criticize traditional philosophy curriculums do so on the basis of a different, or at least just wider, understanding of what philosophy is.

grue, where did you study and where do you work now? pm me if you don't want to say in public.

Will it make you happier? Will it help you make other people happier?

  Babar said:

Fractals are a recent dicovery, and i think they might offer a useful tool for philosophy, as they resolve, just for instance, the god matter :angry:

WAT?

  LARRY said:

Will it make you happier? Will it help you make other people happier?

why do people keep asking me this?

look, i thought i made it fairly clear the past five or six posts....im not in it for any grand scheme, I enjoy reading a good philosophical ponderance as much as the next man enjoys reading a Tolkien book....its something to pass the time and to dwell on, whether i get anything "meaningful" out of it or i decide to join the Peace Corps is secondary.

  encey said:

If you study philosophy in school rather than on your own, you are likely to understand it, think, speak and write about it much better than you would working on it alone. You need to talk to people about the ideas, interpret the texts together, have assignments where you have to write your own arguments and get feedback on them. This is the best way to develop the skills you need to appreciate -- and do -- good philosophy.

 

Also, I think that those who criticize traditional philosophy curriculums do so on the basis of a different, or at least just wider, understanding of what philosophy is.

 

 

grue, where did you study and where do you work now? pm me if you don't want to say in public.

Exactly.

but im not a philosopher, and have never planned on being one. i like to read others ideas on the matter, not explain them to someone else.

Man, you are one fuckin douchebag.

Try and stay in character, white boy.

My favourites at the moment are Kant, Heidegger and Feyerabend.

I read Kant's Prolegomena a couple of months ago and I enjoyed most of it; I'll be reading his Critique of pure reason in the next future.

Hobbes' Leviathan is a long, enjoyable read too.

  Dr Clitterhaus said:

Man, you are one fuckin douchebag.

Try and stay in character, white boy.

go make another desperate thread for attention.

  Super lurker ultra V12 said:

My favourites at the moment are Kant, Heidegger and Feyerabend.

I read Kant's Prolegomena a couple of months ago and I enjoyed most of it; I'll be reading his Critique of pure reason in the next future.

 

Hobbes' Leviathan is a long, enjoyable read too.

Schopenhauer is another favourite of mine, his books are great.

  Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

but im not a philosopher, and have never planned on being one. i like to read others ideas on the matter, not explain them to someone else.

If you can't explain it, you don't understand it. (Now tell me the general view on philosophy that would claim the exact opposite.

Feminism is a little, um, quaint in the 21st century, no? Unless you live in Afghanistan...

Anyway, I can't believe no one's mentioned Atlas Shrugged. Or are you gonna be a typical lefty sheep and just say that Rand is Satan without actually reading any?

Bertrand Russell - History of Western Philosophy. This is supposed to be fairly readable compared to similar texts, have not delved into it too much yet TBH but what I have read has been good. Also Joseph Campbell, Alan Watts and Robert Anton Wilson are always a good read/listen (lots of lectures etc on trackers) although perhaps more mythology/religion than philosophy. DT Suzuki also for a bit more of the Zen side of things if that floats your boat.

  analogue wings said:

Feminism is a little, um, quaint in the 21st century, no?

No. It's one of a few sane responses in a sick society. Despite it being your responsibility to understand the condition and affect of sexual violence in your life and the world it's a part of, the environments we live in often isn't one in which values such as accountability, honesty, or responsibility are much acknowledged in regards to male privilege. And there are social stigmas that in one way or another have the effect of silencing communication about abuse and perpetration. This is no rationale. I encourage you to do your own research. The CDC, RAINN, the dep. of justice's national institute of justice, and the FBI are few places to start. These websites will provide links to primary sources.

Statistics vary of course, but here are a few reported through RAINN:

1 out of every 6 American women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).

9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.

About 3% of American men — or 1 in 33 — have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime.

Males are the least likely to report a sexual assault, though they make up about 10% of all victims.

And it's much more difficult for statistics to speak for instances of sexual violence that go unreported (RAINN reports upwards of sixty percent of rape/sexual assault incidences go unreported according to data released in 2005, Bureau of Justice reported 38.5 percent of rape/sexual assault incidences went unreported in 2003) .

Sexual violence is one of the most visible expressions of patriarchy. You could say it's the 'front line' of sorts. Most expressions of dehumanizing sexism and misogyny are much more subtle and much more acceptable and much less likely to be spoken out against. This means unwanted jokes and sexual advances, devaluing and sometimes violent objectification, disempowering language, thinking silence actually means 'yes', invasion of space or an unwanted presence (creepy staring, intimidating behavior), verbal abuse of all sorts including interrupting and talking over one, the forceful prescription of roles ('look, I work all day and refuse to come home and have to wash the dishes..', 'I refuse to change diapers', 'I refuse to wear condoms so if we're going to have intercourse, you have to take the pill' etc..) and this list could go on and on through all aspects of society - advertising, the workplace, universities (I've read one in four to one in five college attending women have reported experiences that met the legal criteria for rape).

And these aren't rules for oppression. Some female bodied folk may also think jokes about domestic roles are funny or they may appreciate transgressive media which features violence against female bodies or they may even use what others perceive as disempowering language. But this doesn't negate a vast many of people's experiences.

So no, I don't believe feminism is a little quaint in the twenty first century and it isn't only relevant in Afghanistan - where honestly, I think western formulated feminisms have the potential to be less relevant or at least less accessible. I encourage you speak up about sexual violence and transgression with your friends and family, classmates and others in your surroundings - male bodies and female bodies. Feminism isn't just about women or female bodied people.

Really only the tip of the iceberg.